Spent two nights at Trail Camp, August 2 and after summiting, Aug.3.I've never seen so many wag bags at Trail Camp as I did this week. Hidden under rocks, some in the open...it's ridiculous.Does a ranger have to come up and clean up after these irresponsible people or do these bags just sit there for who knows how long?I rarely write posts on this site, I love reading them but just felt compelled to put this out there. I know it's nothing new but it just seems to be getting worse.We did encounter a ranger on the way down and she checked to make sure that we had ours so maybe that's a start.

The wag bag problem seems to get worse. Most of the blame is probably on one-time visitors to Mt. Whitney; the folks who just have to "conquer" to highest peak in the lower 48 states and then go home to their clean toilets.

Now the Whitney Portal Store has E. Coli contamination, which ought to prove that S... indeed flows downhill.

To top it off, the USFS seems incapable of taking the necessary steps to clean up the Whitney trail. The "long term studies" take far to long and merely prove what everyone already knows.

Drastic action is required. Like what? Close the trail from the East side for a few years until proper toilets can be installed along the trail and the trail environment has time to recover. Don't wait for it to happen; too many strident voices of protest from commercial interests in Lone Pine and whining from various political action groups. "Freedom of the hills?" To do what: wallow in our own crap.

I've been a proponent of setting up Wag bag collection stations -- Outpost Camp first, then at Trail Camp. With Llama pack trains to haul it out. Similar to Rocky Mountain National Park's high-elevation toilet system. Maybe the weight of un-dehydrated waste would require too many trips, but who knows? We won't know until it is tried.

It would seem like a pilot test one summer -- or even one month -- would be worth trying.

Question: Couldn't the wag bags have a printed number that could be used to identify the person to whom they were issued? It won't completely solve the problem of human waste but may cause some folks to think twice.

Salty Dog will be going ballistic when he returns from his Alternate JMT route and reads about Rangers searching people for their wag bag. As described in great detail on this forum, there is no Forest Order requiring the use of a wag bag. Why not?

Because a FO requires completion of NEPA (National Environmental Protection Act) and that process was never completed. Imagine if a private company just aborted the NEPA process and did whatever it wanted - there would be outrage and lawsuits. But because this was done with "good intentions" to make people responsible for their human waste, the environmentalists have looked the other way while the toilets were burned down.

What you're seeing with wag bags left behind is an environmental impact due to "noncompliance" with the packout waste alternative. These impacts were clearly identified, anticipated, and evaluated in the Environmental Assessment. That is why the preferred alternative was to rebuild the toilets - it was the most effective protection of the environment with the least environmental impacts. But then the preferred alternative was suddenly switched to wag bags, right when the EA was sent out for public comments. That was very sneaky, and again, would normally cause outrage and perhaps lawsuits. Even so, public comments were overwhelmingly in support of rebuilding the toilets. Even Sequoia-Kings Canyon management wrote a comment letter raising a lot of questions.

After all those shenanigans with the environmental process, now they want to search hikers on the trail for wag bags? This is going from outrageous to legally offensive, in my humble opinion. Welcome back when you read this, SaltyDog, hope you had a great hike.

Something I wasn't anticipating. In the back of Trail Camp, in the rock formations that provide good privacy for toilets, the ground has human scat, making it extremely unsanitary to set a wagbag down there then stow it in one's pack.

On 8/14, following the main trail (not exploring for "private areas") I counted only one wag bag left on the trail, and it appeared to be marked for retrieval upon descent (didn't see it on the way down).

I believe it may be timing, or maybe the M-F crowd is a bit more civilized?

I am way past outrage on this. But I am still curious. Suppose one does get a citation for not carrying a wag-bag. Or not presenting one when asked. How does the ranger fill the ticket out? What provision are you charged with violating? What CFR section and what Forest Order? I have asked this any number of times and have never seen so much as an attempt at an answer.BTW, I am not sure that the ranger conduct described above constitutes a search. Normally a search involves the LEO looking for evidence of a violation. This is more like demanding evidence of compliance.

I am way past outrage on this. But I am still curious. Suppose one does get a citation for not carrying a wag-bag. Or not presenting one when asked. How does the ranger fill the ticket out? What provision are you charged with violating? What CFR section and what Forest Order? I have asked this any number of times and have never seen so much as an attempt at an answer.BTW, I am not sure that the ranger conduct described above constitutes a search. Normally a search involves the LEO looking for evidence of a violation. This is more like demanding evidence of compliance.

How does the ranger even know who you are? I never carry ID, money or credit cards when hiking. You get me up over 12,000 feet, I might not even get my address correct............................................DUG

I am way past outrage on this. But I am still curious. Suppose one does get a citation for not carrying a wag-bag. Or not presenting one when asked. How does the ranger fill the ticket out? What provision are you charged with violating? What CFR section and what Forest Order? I have asked this any number of times and have never seen so much as an attempt at an answer.BTW, I am not sure that the ranger conduct described above constitutes a search. Normally a search involves the LEO looking for evidence of a violation. This is more like demanding evidence of compliance.

How does the ranger even know who you are? I never carry ID, money or credit cards when hiking. You get me up over 12,000 feet, I might not even get my address correct............................................DUG

I am way past outrage on this. But I am still curious. Suppose one does get a citation for not carrying a wag-bag. Or not presenting one when asked. How does the ranger fill the ticket out? What provision are you charged with violating? What CFR section and what Forest Order? I have asked this any number of times and have never seen so much as an attempt at an answer.BTW, I am not sure that the ranger conduct described above constitutes a search. Normally a search involves the LEO looking for evidence of a violation. This is more like demanding evidence of compliance.

How does the ranger even know who you are? I never carry ID, money or credit cards when hiking. You get me up over 12,000 feet, I might not even get my address correct............................................DUG

Your permit.

If you're not going to carry the WAG BAG, why even bother with the permit? ....................................DUG

Not showing your permits - I mean how would they enforce it - will the ranger escort you off the mountain at gun point? Will she call for backup and physically carry you off the mountain?

If someone decided to be truly belligerent - there's not much they can do about it?

For example, when she made me empty out my whole pack just to present the empty WAG bag, what if I hadn't found it? I would've been penalised for being a weary hiker on his way down after a very difficult (for me) hike.